Does Kefalh (“Head”) Mean “Source” Or “Authority Over” in ...

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or

"Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples*

[p.38]

Wayne Grudem

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

(One of the sensitive issues currently being discussed in many churches and seminaries is what the Bible has to say about women. So much has been written on this subject during the past decade that it is now becoming difficult to find anything new or fresh or challenging: positions are becoming hardened, justified by the same arguments someone else has already advanced, without close and humble examination of the validity of those arguments. Dr. Grudem's article breaks that mold: his essay examines an enormous quantity of primary data to provide some controls in establishing the meaning of "head" and "headship" in the New Testament--and as a result he demonstrates convincingly that one major strand of modern interpretation, repeated from book to book, is simply wrong. Because of the primary nature of this research, we have decided to publish his essay here, even though it is simultaneously being published as an appendix to the new edition of George Knight's The Role Relationship of Men and Women, published by Moody Press. --Ed.)

When the New Testament says that the "head of every man is Christ" and "the head of a woman is the man" (1 Cor 11:3), or that "the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church" (Eph 5:23), Christians have usually understood the word head to mean "authority over." Thus, Christ is the authority over the church and a husband is the authority over his wife.

But that viewpoint has been challenged recently by those who claim, at least for some passages, that the word head means "source" or "origin" rather than "authority over." Thus, Christ is the source of every man, Christ is the source of the church, and--referring to Adam and Eve--the man is the source of the woman. It is the purpose of this appendix to examine that recent claim on the basis of a survey of more than 2,300 examples of the Greek word ("head") from ancient Greek literature.

Arguments in Favor of the Meaning "Source"

Modern Authors Perhaps the most influential and explicit statement of the position that

[p.39]

means "source" was the article, "Does Male Dominance Tarnish Our Translations?" by Berkeley and Alvera Mickelsen.1The Mickelsens argued that head in Greek usage "does

* Reprinted from the appendix of The Role Relationship of Men and Women, by George W. Knight III. Copyright

1977,1985 by George W,: Knight III. Used by permission of Moody Press. 1 Berkeley Mickelsen and Alvera Mickelsen, "Does Male Dominance Tarnish Our Translations?" Christianity Today, 5 October 1979, pp. 23-29. (See also their article, "The `Head' of the Epistles," Christianity Today, 20

February 1981, pp. 20-23.)

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

not mean `boss' or `final authority,'" but that a "common meaning" was "source, or origin, as we use it in the `head of the Mississippi River'" (p.23). They suggested the meaning "source" for the word head in 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Colossians 1:18.

Other writers make similar claims. Regarding 1 Corinthians 11:3, Margaret Howe states, "The word head here must be understood not as `ruler' but as `source.' Christ came from God; he is `the only Son from the Father' (John 1:14). As the agent of creation (John 1:3), Christ brought the man into being... and from the male of the species, the female came into being (Gen 2:21?22).2

Letha Scanzoni and Nancy Hardesty say, "kephale is used almost synonymously with arche, `beginning,' somewhat similar to our use of `the headwaters of a river' or `fountain head.' "Thus, when Ephesians 5:23 says "Christ is the head of the church, his body," they take it to mean that He is the church's "lifegiver." And when Colossians 2:10 calls Christ "the head of all rule and authority," Scanzoni and Hardesty say, `"Head' here obviously means `source.' "Similarly, "Christ's headship over the chruch refers to his being the source of its life."3

Richard and Joyce Boldrey apparently support this interpretation when they say of 1 Corinthians 11, "When Paul spoke of woman's head being the man, he was emphasizing man's temporal priority and woman's derivation from him."4

The foregoing authors represent what we may call a "Christian feminist" perspective; others who do not generally endorse the Christian feminist position have also supported this view of . Commenting on 1 Corinthians 11:3, F. F. Bruce writes, "By head in this context we are probably to understand not, as has frequently been suggested, `chief' or `ruler' but rather `source' or `origin'--a sense well attested for Greek ." Similarly, C. K. Barrett says," In Greek usage the word, when metaphorical, may apply... to origin... That this is the sense of the word here is strongly suggested by verses 8f." Colin Brown says of 1 Corinthians 11:3, "Here `head' is probably to be understood not as `chief' or `ruler' but as `source,' or `origin.'" And James Hurley, although retaining the sense "authority over" in 1 Corinthians 11:3, allows the meaning "source" in Colossians 2:19 and Ephesians 4:15. He says, "In English we speak of the `head' of a river to refer to its point of origin. This was a typical usage of `head' () in classical Greek... In Paul's day, therefore, the Greek word `head' () could mean a physical head, a person with authority, or the source of something. Head () was used in first-century Greek as a synonym for the more common words for `ruler' (?rcwn) and for `source' (?rc?)."5

[p.40]

Summary of evidence supporting the meaning "source" The repeated claim by these authors is that source was a commonly known or easily recognized sense of the word head () for the Greek-speaking readers of Paul's epistles.

2 Margaret Howe, Women and Church Leadership (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), p. 60. 3 Letha Scanzoni and Nancy Hardesty, All We're Meant to Be (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1974), pp. 30-31; 100. 4 Richard Boldrey and Joyce Boldrey, Chauvinist or Feminist? Paul's View of Women (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976), p. 34. 5 F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971), p. 103.; C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: Black, 1971), p. 248; Colin Brown, "Head," in New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976) 2:156?63; James Hurley, Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective (London: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p. 164.

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

Indeed, that point must be established by anyone arguing for the meaning "source" in the New Testament. For if we cannot show that "source" was a recognized meaning of in the ancient world, then we must conclude that no such possible meaning would have come to the minds of Paul or his readers, and we shall be forced to look at other possible senses to interpret the New Testament passages in question.

What kind of evidence is needed? The same kind needed to establish the possible meaning of any word in ancient literature: brief quotations from a few occurrences of the word in any ancient Greek writer where the context makes it clear that the author is using to mean "source." That is the common procedure for establishing possible meanings for words in all New Testament study; if "source" is to be considered a legitimate sense of , we must have such evidence.

The need for such clear examples is even more important because "source" is not listed as a possible meaning for in the standard lexicon for New Testament Greek by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker. Nor do the older New Testament lexicons by Thayer or Cremer list such a sense; nor does the lexicon to the papyri by Moulton and Milligan.6 (See the discussion below regarding the entry in Liddell-Scott, the lexicon for classical--not specifically New Testament--Greek.)

Thus, authors who propose the sense "source" are proposing a new meaning, one previously unrecognized by New Testament lexicons. That does not make the meaning "source" impossible, but it does mean that we are right to demand some convincing citations from ancient Greek literature that the editors of these lexicons had overlooked or misunderstood.

The evidence given by the previously mentioned authors is as follows: Margaret Howe, Richard and Joyce Boldrey, and Letha Scanzoni and Nancy Hardesty cite no evidence from ancient literature or from other scholars. F.F. Bruce and James Hurley cite no evidence from ancient literature, but

[p.41]

both refer to an article by Stephen Bedale.7 Hurley says that Bedale "provides careful documentation of the meaning of " (p. 164, n. 1). Colin Brown cites no evidence from ancient literature but refers to the commentary by F. F. Bruce and the article by Bedale. Berkeley and Alvera Mickelsen cite no evidence from ancient literature, but they do refer to the meaning "source" listed in the Liddel-Scott lexicon for classical Greek. The entry in this Liddell-Scott lexicon cites Herodotus 4.91 and Orphic Fragments 21a as evidence for the meaning "source."8 C. K. Barrett also mentions the Bedale article and cites Herodotus 4.91 (correctly noting that the plural "heads" is used there) and Orphic Fragments 21a, the same two texts cited by the Liddel-Scott lexicon. Thus, apart from the "careful documentation" we

6 W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed. rev. (Chicago: U. of Chicago, 1979); Joseph H. Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956; Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, trans. W. Urwick (1886; reprinted, Naperville, Ill.: Alienson, n.d.); J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources, 2 vols. (New York: Gordon, 1977). 7 Stephen Bedale, "The Meaning of in the Pauline Epistles," Journal of Theological Studies n.s. 5 (1954): 211-15. 8 H. G. Liddell and Robert Scott, eds., A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed., with Supplement (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968).

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

have been told to expect in the article by Bedale, the actual hard data adduced to support the meaning "source" turn out to consist of just two texts.

Moreover, upon reading the frequently-cited article by Bedale we are surprised to find that he does not cite even one text from ancient Greek literature outside the Bible. Thus the widely accepted argument for a "common" use of to mean "source" in extra-Biblical Greek literature has rested on only two occurrences of the word. Whether or not those will actually support the argument must be decided by looking at the two texts themselves. But before we do that, it is appropriate to analyze briefly the 1954 article by Bedale.

The argument by Bedale Bedale bases his argument for the meaning "source" in 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 4:15, and Colossians 2:19 on the following three points:

(1) does not normally mean "ruler." Bedale says, "In normal Greek usage, classical or contemporary, does not signify `head' in the sense of ruler, or chieftan, of a community.9 Bedale cites no evidence--no results of word studies, no lexical authorities--to demonstrate his point; he simply assumes it to be true for the rest of the article.

In the following major section of this essay I will quote thirty-two examples of used to mean "authority over" or "ruler" in Greek writings outside the New Testament (seventeen are from Greek translations of the Old Testament and fifteen are from other literature). On the basis of those quotations it is safe to conclude that this first point of Bedale's argument is simply a misstatement of the facts and cannot be accepted as valid.

(2) The ancient world did not think that the head controlled the body. Bedale's second point of support is the assertion that Paul and his readers would not think of the head as the ruling or controlling part of the body, for

[p.42]

that idea was contrary to popular psychology in the ancient world. In fact, Bedale says that J. Armitage Robinson is "guilty of serious anachronism" (p. 212) when Robinson writes that it is natural to think of Christ as the body's head in Ephesians 4:15, "for," says Robinson, "that is the seat of the brain which controls and unifies the organism." Bedale says that such a metaphor "would be unintelligible to St. Paul or his readers... In St. Paul's day, according to popular psychology, both Greek and Hebrew, a man reasoned and purposed, not `with his head,' but `in his heart.'"10

Is Bedale correct in asserting that the ancient world did not think of the head as controlling or ruling the body? Once again he gives no evidence to support this affirmation. In fact, there is significant evidence to contradict it. Plato (5th-4th cent. B.C.), describing the parts of the human body, wrote of "the head which is the most divine part and which reigns () over all the parts within us" (Timaeus 44.D). Plutarch (A.D. 46-120), one of the most prominent Greek authors from the New Testament period (and one who reflected secular thinking independent of Jewish or Christian influence), explained why the words soul () and head () can be used to speak of the whole person: "We affectionately call a person

9 Bedale, p. 211. 10 Ibid., p. 212.

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

`soul' or `head' from his ruling parts (?p? t?n kuriotat?n)" (Table-Talk 692.D.11). Philo (Jewish philosopher, c. 30 B.C.--c. A.D. 45), representing one aspect of first century Judaism, had a similar understanding: "As the head in the living body is the ruling place (t? ?gemonsuon pr?pon), so Ptolemy became head among kings" (Life of Moses 2.30). "The mind is the head and ruler (?gemonik?n) of the sense-perception in us" (Life of Moses 2.82); `"Head' we interpret allegorically to be the ruling (?gem?na) mind of the soul" (On Dreams 2.207).

In light of those statements from three very diverse authors, Bedale's second major point, that a metaphor of the head ruling the body "would be unintelligible to St. Paul or his readers," must be rejected as contrary to fact and therefore invalid.

(3) The Septuagint shows that can mean "source." This is Bedale's final major point. He argues as follows:

(a) The Hebrew word ("head") was translated sometimes by and sometimes by ?rc? ("beginning" or "ruler") in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament used by both Jews and Christians in the first century). (b) When meant a literal head of a person or animal, or the "top" of some object, the Septuagint translated it with . (c) When meant "first" or "beginning"--as it sometimes did in the Hebrew Old Testament-- it was translated by ?rch. (d) When rs meant "ruler" or "chief" it was translated by either or ?rch (even though more often than either of those it was translated by ?rcwn or ?rchg?j, more common words for "ruler"). (This point, incidentally, admits the meaning of "ruler" for Septuagint Greek and thus seems to contradict Bedale's first major argument-- unless he means to exclude the Septuagint by using the phrase "normal Greek usage.") (e) Consequently, "in St. Paul's usage, may very well approximate in meaning to ?rc?." (f) Bedale concludes that since ?rc? sometimes means "source," in Paul's writings may mean "source" as well, and he

[p.43]

applies this to 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 4:15, and Colossians 2:19.11

How should this third argument be evaluated? It is a classic example of a major exegetical error. Bedale has skipped from the idea that in one sense ("ruler") and ?rc? have the same meaning (point d above) to an unwarranted assertion that in other senses ("beginning," "source"), or perhaps in all senses, they have the same meaning (points e and f above). He even speaks of a "virtual equation of with ?rc?12 But he gives not one text to demonstrate that the words share the meanings "source" or "beginning."

In fact, the reader will search Bedale's article in vain for any examples showing that ever meant "source" in the Septuagint. It is understandable that ?rc?, which sometimes meant "leader," would be interchangeable with in Old Testament texts in which the concept "ruler" is present. But that fact alone does not demonstrate that could take on other senses of ?rc? such as "source."

11 Ibid., p. 213 12 Ibid.

Wayne Grudem, "Does Kefalh ("Head") Mean "Source" Or "Authority Over" in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples," Trinity Journal ns 6.1 (Spring 1985): 38-59.

A parallel to Bedale's argument in English would be if I were to argue (1) that "jump" and "spring" could both be used to translate some foreign word when it referred to a "leap in the air," and (2) that therefore there is a "virtual equation of `jump' and `spring' in English." I would then go on to argue that "jump" also can mean "a fountain of water," or "a coil of metal," or "a pleasant season of the year when flowers begin to bloom." If I produced no unambiguous examples of written texts where "jump" clearly took these senses, readers would rightly think my reasoning erroneous and invalid.

Similarly, since Bedale has produced no example of Septuagint texts in which means "source," his third and final argument must be rejected as faulty in reasoning, unsupported by any hard facts, and therefore invalid. We may hope that Bedale's article will no longer be quoted as proving that at the time of the New Testament could mean "source," for his first two points are simply contrary to fact, and his third point commits a major exegetical blunder that leads him to a false conclusion.

If Bedale's article does not prove that can mean "source," we are left with only two remaining pieces of evidence that have been used to prove that meaning: Herodotus 4.91 and Orphic Fragments 21a.

The Evidence From Ancient Literature Herodotus (5th cent. B.C.) says, "From the heads (, plural) of the Tearus River flows water most pleasant and good" (4.91). But when we look again at the Liddell-Scott lexicon under we find that refers to the source of a river only in the plural; in the singular it means "mouth" of a river (they cite Callimachus, Aetia. 2.46, "I know Gela [a city], placed at the mouth [] of a river," referring to Gela on the south coast of Sicily at the mouth of the Gelas River).

[p.44]

How can the same word refer to the sources of a river in the plural, but the mouth of the river in the singular? The answer is evident from an examination of the general category of meanings listed under this sense (II) in Liddell-Scott: "of things, extremity." That is, the end point or furthest extension of an item can be called its head: the "top, brim of a vessel"; the "capital of a column"; the "coping of a wall"; the "head of a garlic"; the "base of the heart"; the "origin [in the sense of "point of origin" or "starting point"] of muscles"; the "extremity of a plot of land"; the "beginning of a period of time." (They give examples for all of these.) We see this sense of "end point" in Psalm 118:22 (LXX Ps 117:22), "The stone which the builders rejected has become the head () of the corner," namely, the starting point or furthest end stone of the corner. (That verse is quoted in Matt 21:42; Mk 12:10; Lk 20:17; Acts 4:11; and 1 Pet 2:7, all using .) In fact, takes the sense "top" or "end point" 22 times in the Septuagint alone. (Gen 8:5; 11:14; 28:12; 2 Chr 3:16; Job 1:17, et al). For example, the ends of the poles used to carry the Ark of the Covenant are called the "heads" of the poles in the Septuagint translation of 1 Kings 8:8 (LXX 3 Kings 8:8). This is a natural and understandable extension of the word head, since our heads are at the "top" or "end" of our bodies.

Now the river quotations become clear. Someone speaking of the "heads" of a river is speaking of the many "ends" of a river where tributaries begin to flow toward the main stream. On the other hand, someone speaking of the "head" of a river is speaking of the one point at which the river enters into the sea, what we call in English the "mouth" of the river.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download